The Cycle of Reactive Governance in Ghana: A Call for Proactive Accountability

Ghana continues to grapple with socioeconomic and governance challenges, many of which stem from a deeply ingrained culture of reaction rather than prevention. Successive administrations have often relied on establishing ad hoc committees and temporary solutions in response to crises, scandals, and public outcry. While such measures serve as political palliatives, they fail to address the systemic issues perpetuating corruption and inefficiency in governance. The real challenge lies not in reacting to problems as they arise but in creating structures that prevent them.

One of the most prominent examples of this reactive governance is the widespread theft of public funds, often followed by promises to recover the stolen resources. Former President John Mahama's recent pledge to retrieve looted state funds is a case in point. While retrieving misappropriated resources is a necessary step, it is insufficient. The deeper questions remain: What proactive measures will be implemented to prevent future looting? How will systemic accountability be embedded into the fabric of governance? These questions demand urgent answers because Ghana's governance problems transcend political party affiliations; they are structural and require comprehensive solutions rather than rhetorical commitments.

Asset and Conflict of Interest Declarations

A foundational element of any effort to instill accountability in governance is the declaration of assets and conflicts of interest by political appointees. This step enhances transparency and establishes a benchmark for ethical leadership. Despite its simplicity and practicality, successive governments have failed to implement this measure effectively, leaving a glaring gap in accountability.

Mandating asset declarations within the first 30 days would serve as a bold statement of intent for any incoming administration, particularly Mr. Mahama. Furthermore, making these declarations accessible would foster trust and empower citizens to monitor potential conflicts of interest. By instituting this practice, Ghana would take a significant step toward creating a governance culture of integrity and openness.

Strengthening Accountability Institutions

Ghana's accountability institutions, such as the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) and the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP), remain pivotal in the fight against corruption. Unfortunately, these bodies have been chronically underfunded and subjected to political interference, rendering them ineffective in their mandate to uphold justice and transparency.

Strengthening these institutions requires a multifaceted approach. Adequate funding must be allocated to ensure they have the resources to conduct independent investigations and prosecutions. Legislative reforms should be introduced to protect these bodies from political interference, safeguarding their autonomy and impartiality. Additionally, equipping the OSP with the necessary tools, technology, and personnel would enable it to process cases swiftly and effectively. Without these measures, accountability institutions will continue to be symbolic rather than substantive in their roles.

Overhauling Procurement and Contract Protocols

Public procurement remains one of Ghana's most significant avenues for corruption, with inflated contracts, kickbacks, and opaque processes undermining national development. Tackling corruption in this area requires a fundamental overhaul of procurement and contract protocols.

Digitizing all procurement processes would be a critical step toward enhancing transparency and reducing opportunities for malpractice.

To deter misconduct, strict penalties for breaches of procurement laws should be consistently enforced. Independent audits of major government contracts would ensure accountability and provide a clear deterrent against corrupt practices. By addressing the vulnerabilities in public procurement, Ghana could redirect significant resources toward development and public welfare.

Tackling Kickbacks and Party Middlemen

Kickbacks and the pervasive influence of party loyalists acting as middlemen in government projects are well-documented issues that continue to erode public trust in governance. Despite widespread awareness of these practices, successive governments have failed to confront them decisively.

A clear and enforceable policy against kickbacks and the involvement of party intermediaries in state projects is long overdue. Coupled with robust enforcement mechanisms, such a policy would signal a commitment to ethical governance. Without action in this area, any incoming administration risks perpetuating the perception of complicity in corruption, undermining its credibility and legitimacy.

Building Trust through Proactive Governance

The reactive nature of governance in Ghana has fostered widespread cynicism among the populace. Citizens have grown weary of promises and piecemeal reforms that fail to deliver lasting change. Proactive governance, on the other hand, builds trust by addressing systemic issues before they become crises.

Measures such as asset declarations, institutional strengthening, procurement reform, and clear policies against kickbacks and intermediaries are not merely technical fixes; they represent a shift in governance philosophy. Ghanaians are not asking for perfection. They demand visible progress, tangible steps toward reform, and a government prioritizing prevention over reaction.

Conclusion
While initiatives, like Operation Recover All Loot (ORAL), are commendable, they are insufficient without a broader commitment to structural reform. The credibility of any incoming administration, including Mr. Mahama's, will depend on its ability to articulate and implement a comprehensive plan for preventive governance. The steps outlined above offer a roadmap for building a governance culture that serves the collective good, from mandatory asset declarations to institutional strengthening and procurement reform.

Ghana deserves a government that leads by example, prioritizing systemic reform over superficial fixes. By embracing proactive accountability, the nation can break free from the cycle of reactive governance and lay the foundation for sustainable development and trust in its democratic institutions.